Mussina and Palmer

[Sports Guy]

I hope Moose gets it!

[El Gordo]

I'll be pulling for him.:thumbsup1:

[TakebackOPACY]

He also passed Cy Young tonight to move into 19th All-Time in career strikeouts. He has 2804, surpassing CY Young's 2803.

CORRECTION: ESPN.go.com has his start from today in his season stats, but not in the career stats directly underneath. I guess that line will update shortly. Mussina passed Cy Young in his last start, I think. Today's start would give him 2810 career strikeouts.

[Fred Manfraud]

Part of me wishes I could be like you guys rooting for Mussina to get his 20th win. I just can't, however. I'm still bitter about the whole thing and I know it's not rational. I hope the last game gets rained out or something. I guess it's just a character flaw on my part.

[McLovin]

From the man - Palmer himself:

http://masnsports.com/2008/09/cakes-on-moose.html

Two things stand out:

Palmer actually did a little research to aid his argument, placing a call to Elias and obtaining Mussina's ERA differential vs. the rest of the league during the former Orioles' career.

It's cool that Palmer understands the stats. I myself had to be educated that you can't compare their career ERA's.

"I always said I thought he was every bit as good as I was," Palmer said.

Wow, that's a great compliment. I think he's being way too nice, but whatever...

[Frobby]

From the man - Palmer himself:...

Wow, that's a great compliment. I think he's being way too nice, but whatever...

Those are very gracious comments by Palmer. I'm sure they are heartfelt.

I hope Mussina's detractors will read this and realize that Palmer himself is debunking their arguments. Everything he said in there is legit, though I'd still give Palmer a small edge over Mussina for the reasons I expressed in the thread.

[Ned from York]

So what was Palmer's ERA differential and what were both of their's in percentage terms?

[DrungoHazewood]

So what was Palmer's ERA differential and what were both of their's in percentage terms?

Their ERA+'s are almost identical. Meaning their ERAs were the same after taking account run context and park effects.

[ledzepp8]

Their ERA+'s are almost identical. Meaning their ERAs were the same after taking account run context and park effects.

I think he meant, what were their ERA differentials in comparison to their peers...which is I assume what Palmer was talking about in the quote from Roch.

[Frobby]

I think he meant, what were their ERA differentials in comparison to their peers...which is I assume what Palmer was talking about in the quote from Roch.

What peers are we talking about? Mussina is 18th on the active list in career ERA+. But a lot of the guys ahead of him are in their prime now and haven't yet gone through the period of their careers where they are still good pitchers but not as good as they used to be. That list also includes relievers, who always tend to have better ERAs. Of the starting pitchers nearing the end of their careers:

Martinez 155

Johnson 137

Maddux 132

Schilling 127

Smoltz 127 (spend several years as a reliever)

Lowe 122 (he's only 35 and had several years as a reliever)

Mussina 122

Glavine 118

Pettitte 116

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/ERAplus_active.shtml

There are many Hall of Famers below 122.

[Frobby]

Palmer also had 168 CG in 332 starts in those nine seasons.

Today I happened to come across the stats of Red Ruffing, who pitched in the 1920's, 30's and 40's. Ruffing won 273 games compared to Jim Pamer's 268. He had 335 complete games in 536 career starts (62.5%) compared to Palmer's 211 in 521 career starts (40.5%). Do you suppose that when Palmer was up for induction, some people voted against him because he had "only" 211 complete games? I bet some did.

[Ori-Al]

If Mussina had pitched in a four man rotation (which should still be the norm - a rhythhm of pitch-rest-throw-rest-pitch is easier on pitcher's arms than the uneven pattern required in a five man rotation, as George Bamberger once said in a reply to my question in which I asked about that on a talk show years ago), he would have had 4 to 6 more starts per season and won 20 games a few times. As it is, he is about the same as Palmer in the most important category, giving up earned runs in a game compared to his peers.

How does Mussina's run support each season compare with Palmer's each season?

[Frobby]

How does Mussina's run support each season compare with Palmer's each season?

You'd have to look at that in the context of when they played, just as you have to look at ERA in that context. But I'd bet that, adjusted for era, their run support was very similar. They have a nearly identical ERA+ and a nealry identical winning percentage. It therefore stands to reason that their run support (as adjsuted for era) was about the same.

[ledzepp8]

What peers are we talking about? Mussina is 18th on the active list in career ERA+. But a lot of the guys ahead of him are in their prime now and haven't yet gone through the period of their careers where they are still good pitchers but not as good as they used to be. That list also includes relievers, who always tend to have better ERAs. Of the starting pitchers nearing the end of their careers:

Martinez 155

Johnson 137

Maddux 132

Schilling 127

Smoltz 127 (spend several years as a reliever)

Lowe 122 (he's only 35 and had several years as a reliever)

Mussina 122

Glavine 118

Pettitte 116

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/ERAplus_active.shtml

There are many Hall of Famers below 122.

I think what he's referring to, is how much better or worse was Palmer's ERA in comparison to the pitchers he pitched with and Mussina's ERA in comparison to the pitchers he pitched with.

[Frobby]

I think what he's referring to, is how much better or worse was Palmer's ERA in comparison to the pitchers he pitched with and Mussina's ERA in comparison to the pitchers he pitched with.

That is what ERA+ is, except that it also adjusts for the ballparks the pitcher pitched in.